[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20241106120819.GA5006@unreal>
Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2024 14:08:19 +0200
From: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
To: Junxian Huang <huangjunxian6@...ilicon.com>
Cc: dennis.dalessandro@...nelisnetworks.com, jgg@...pe.ca,
linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, linuxarm@...wei.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tangchengchang@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH for-next 0/2] Small optimization for ib_map_mr_sg() and
ib_map_mr_sg_pi()
On Tue, Nov 05, 2024 at 08:08:39PM +0800, Junxian Huang wrote:
> ib_map_mr_sg() and ib_map_mr_sg_pi() allow ULPs to specify NULL as
> the sg_offset/data_sg_offset/meta_sg_offset arguments. Drivers who
> need to derefernce these arguments have to add NULL pointer checks
> to avoid crashing the kernel.
>
> This can be optimized by adding dummy sg_offset pointer to these
> two APIs. When the sg_offset arguments are NULL, pass the pointer
> of dummy to drivers. Drivers can always get a valid pointer, so no
> need to add NULL pointer checks.
>
> Junxian Huang (2):
> RDMA/core: Add dummy sg_offset pointer for ib_map_mr_sg() and
> ib_map_mr_sg_pi()
> RDMA: Delete NULL pointer checks for sg_offset in .map_mr_sg ops
>
> drivers/infiniband/core/verbs.c | 12 +++++++++---
> drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/mr.c | 18 ++++++------------
> drivers/infiniband/sw/rdmavt/trace_mr.h | 2 +-
> 3 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
So what does this change give us?
We have same functionality, same number of lines, same everything ...
Thanks
>
> --
> 2.33.0
>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists